Rank the Champions of this decade

[RoyceDa59]

Pretty simple concept, worthy of discussion now that we've seen this decade open and close with a Lakers championship.

NBA Champions of the 2000-2009 Decade:

1. 2001 Lakers (Shaq in his prime + Kobe)
2. 2005 Spurs (Duncan is his prime + Manu)
3. 2002 Lakers (Shaq and Kobe)
4. 2004 Pistons (Billups, Rip, Prince, Sheed, Ben)
5. 2008 Celtics (KG + Pierce + Allen)
6. 2000 Lakers (Shaq + young Kobe)
7. 2007 Spurs (Duncan + Parker)
8. 2003 Spurs (Duncan at his very best)
9. 2009 Lakers (Kobe in his prime + Gasol)
10. 2006 Heat (Wade in his prime + older Shaq)

How would you rank the champions of this decade?

[eyriq]

NBA Champions of the 2000-2009 Decade:

1. 2008 Celtics
2. 2007 Spurs
3. 2000 Lakers
4.2009 Lakers
5. 2005 Spurs
6. 2002 Lakers
7. 2004 Pistons
8. 2003 Spurs
9. 2001 Lakers
10. 2006 Heat

[Phil Jackson]

1. 2000/2001/2002/2009 Lakers
5. 2004 Pistons
6. 2005 Spurs
7. 2007 Spurs
8. 2003 Spurs
9. 2008 Celtics
10. 2006 Heat

[RoyceDa59]

^ lol you crack me up Phil.

[LA Warrior]

NBA Champions of the 2000-2009 Decade:

1. 2008 Celtics
2. 2007 Spurs
3. 2000 Lakers
4.2009 Lakers
5. 2005 Spurs
6. 2002 Lakers
7. 2004 Pistons
8. 2003 Spurs
9. 2001 Lakers
10. 2006 Heat

2001 lakers 9th? just wow

[D-31]

1. 2001 Lakers
2. 2004 Pistons
3. 2002 Lakers
4. 2008 Celtics
5. 2000 Lakers
6. 2005 Spurs
7. 2007 Spurs
8. 2003 Spurs
9. 2009 Lakers
10. 2006 Heat

[TommyTheCat]

michael phelps
14 olympic gold (a record 8 in beijing) medals
18 world championship gold medals
8 pan pacific gold medals

[thevolv]

1. 2005 Spurs
2. 2001 lakers
3. 2003 Spurs
4. 2008 Celtics
5. 2004 Pistons
6. 2002 lakers
7. 2007 Spurs
8. 2000 lakers



9. 2009 lakers
10. 2006 Heat

Both the last two teams would have struggled to make the Conference Finals, let alone win the Championship, in most seasons. Both won their rings because of flukiness (Wade getting RIDICULOUSLY hot.... and all the calls), and/or injuries (KG, Yao, Jameer, etc). You put them up against the Top 8, and I think they struggle to win 2 games, and most likely get run out in 4 or 5.

The other 8 were "legit" Championship level teams in my mind. They could compete with/beat most any other Championship team given, with a few notable exceptions, as none of these teams are GREAT in a historical sense.

[Flash3]

michael phelps
14 olympic gold (a record 8 in beijing) medals
18 world championship gold medals
8 pan pacific gold medals

[Iggyemu]

michael phelps
14 olympic gold (a record 8 in beijing) medals
18 world championship gold medals
8 pan pacific gold medals

And 5 bong hits.

[DallasShalDune]

1. 2001 Lakers
2. 2002 Lakers
3. 2008 Celtics
4. 2005 Spurs
5. 2007 Spurs
6. 2003 Spurs
7. 2000 Lakers
8. 2009 Lakers
9. 2004 Pistons
10. 2006 Heat

[andrewww]

1. 2001 lakers
2. 2000 lakers
3. 2004 pistons
4. 2005 spurs
5. 2002 lakers
6. 2008 celtics
7. 2003 spurs
8. 2009 lakers
9. 2007 spurs
10. 2006 heat

[Lakers05]

1) 2008 Celtics - I think this team would match up well with any team of this decade, since they don't have any player that relies on zone or no-zone to be effective.

2) 03 Spurs. They won 62, but really could have won more, if the season had gone on longer, as their young players really started to come together. Swept the 3-peat Lakers in the regular season, and really didn't give us a chance in the postseason, a truly impressive accomplishment.

3)04 Pistons - historical defense. Should have repeated, but lost to Pop's great coaching(this was IMO, the start of the concept of "raising your mental toughness/determination," blah blah blah.

4) 01 Lakers - greatly overrated. If you stop Kobe, you stop this team, as the 03 Spurs showed(yeah, Shaq was slightly out of his prime then, but even if he was in his prime, it would have made the series closer, not beat them.)

5) 09 Lakers - would be able to compete with any of the above, though probably a slight underdog in each.

The rest, I think, are a clear cut below this group(Shaq was out of prime in 02, matured Parker/Ginobilli Spurs lost to a Lakers team without Ariza and Bynum).

[That Nicka]

2001 Lakers
2002 Lakers
2005 Spurs
2008 Celtics
2004 Pistons
2007 Spurs
2000 Lakers
2009 Lakers
2003 Spurs
2006 Heat

[CITYOFANGELSX3]

2001 Lakers

[cvballa23]

Anyone who puts the 2008 Celtics at the top of the list is LOOOOOOOOOOOST! This is a team that won only 3 road games! Was taken to 7 games twice (one by the Hawks!) and beat a very inexperienced lakers team (aside from Kobe and Dfish no one had much playoff experience).

The 2001 lakers are clearly the best team of the decade! 15-1 record and the one loss was in OT. And went into Philly and won all 3 games in their house! They ran through Portland, Sacramento and San Antonio before then without losing a single game! All big time teams at that time!

[cuad]

Pretty simple concept, worthy of discussion now that we've seen this decade open and close with a Lakers championship.

NBA Champions of the 2000-2009 Decade:


3. 2002 Lakers (Refs and Stern)


How would you rank the champions of this decade?

Fixed.

[bjax24]

1A. 2001 Lakers
1B. 2008 Celtics
2. 2002 Lakers
3. 2005 Spurs
4. 2004 Pistons
5. 2007 Spurs
6. 2003 Spurs
7. 2000 Lakers
8. 2009 Lakers
9. 2006 Heat

[Silverballer]

were this year's lakers really THAT weak?

[cvballa23]

were this year's lakers really THAT weak?

No! I definitely wouldnt put them near the bottom of the list or the top, somewhere in the middle. They are too deep and have too much star power to be viewed as that bad. They added Ariza and Shannon Brown to last years finals team along with a semi-healthy Bynum.

My list:
2001 Lakers
2003 Spurs
2002 Lakers
2005 Spurs
2009 Lakers
2008 Celtics
2000 Lakers
2007 Spurs
2004 Pistons
2006 Heat